Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1887-07-01
CURRENT AFFAIRS.


The decision Of the board Of visitors Of
Andover theological seminary in the matter
of the long discussed "Andover controver-
sy" has at length been given to the public.
Despite all the long waiting, the decision,
now it has come, is inconsistent, unsatis-
factory, and settles nothing. 1t is the iudg-
ment Of the board that the foremost Of the
defendants, Prof. Egbert G. Smyth, presi
dent of the faculty, shall be removed, but
the remaining four are acquitted. Yet they
were all prosecuted jointly on the same
charges 1t was alleged that by supporting
certain doctrines in the Andover Review
and the book entitled Progressive Ortho-
doxy"-the five professors being the editors
Of the Review and the authors Of the book
-tthey had taught many things which can
not be reconciled with that orthodox and
consistent Calvinism which the statutes Of
the seminary require Of them" and that
they had "broken solemn promises made
when they subscribed 10 the creed" 1t is
curious fact that Prof. Smyth is found
gultyu upon evidence afforded 10y paragraphs
which he did not write, while his four as
sociates, by whom the paragraphs in ques
tion were written, escape condemnation.
The question at issue was not the sound
ness Of the doctrines taught by the profes-
sors, but whether they taught the old Sc
we're creed laid down eighty years ago by
men who gave money TO found the chairs
| which the offending professors now occupy.
| The main stress is on the question Of pro
! baton after death for those who die with
out knowledge Of the Christian religion.
! The professors have claimed the right OF
! liberty Of Interpretation, the right to ell
durse the creed subject to the changing
aspects Of unchanged truths, - the right OF
"A working construction Of the creed
! The attorney for the compainants, on the
other hand, argued that the creed is the
basis Of business contract, and should b,
interpreted according to the rules which ar,
universally recognized in constituting lega
documents. not by what some individual
think it ought to say, or even by what the!
suppose the trainers would have said ha,
they been alive today.
The Boston Advertiser sums up the situa
ton pretty accurately, we imagine, in thi
paragraph;
There is something positively grotesqu
about this whole performance. For year
the hue and cry has been sounded, tn
whole land has been made to echo with tn
clainor, that IA great breach Of trust wa
being committed at Anduver, that the foun
dntions Of faith were in danger, and tina
something must be done or lions wall
would fall to rise no more. Al length ther
was n great trial vuuminous testimony
learned and lengthy arguments Then fo
nearly six months the public almost held IT
breath. waiting for the verdict. Now "
have the verdict. And what is it Fo
substance Of doctrine, To use a well-know
theological phrase, it is this That the aC
cusations Of false teaching are true ther,
fore all the professors who give instructio
in the departments principally affected 10
the false teaching shall remain and 90 o
a. before, unhndcred and uucensureC
while the professor of ecclesiastical histor
Prof Smythl, whose department has an
can have little or nothing to do with eithC
Of the matters Of alleged false teaching
shall be turned out.
Another interesting fact is that it is opel
ly alleged in some quarters that the sinl
ling out Of Prof. Smyth for condemnatio
is due to the personal animosity of OF
vindictiye old man. DR.. Parks, whose ol
position to the professor is well understoC
to have been due to the fact that he wantt
the chair of church history for himself 80
The case will, it is said, 90 to the Mass
chusctts supreme court on appeal. Pro
Smith will appeal because he regards Il
decision as unjust and holds that the pr
ceedings were illegal the trustees will a
peal ON the ground that their powers al
. functions were usurped by the visitors, al
these appeals will again raise the questi,
of Jurisdiction. which the visitors decid,
in their own favor.